
^r.^a*- --.^^Av4 









.^ 









^1^^. 




.:^ 



jassi 






;-i5».:-> 



fc^ 



^:^ 









^ -is^. 




r« LIBIURY OF CONGKKSS. 5; 



^/.y,. t^V^^^ 



j^^^iDf "Z- \ 



t UNITRI> STATES l)K AMKIMCA. 



SPEECH 



OF 



HON. ALEX. -W^'^UEL, 



IN DEFENCE OF THE 



CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION. 



DELIVERED AT A PUBLIC DINNER GIVEN TO HIM BY HIS 
FELLOW-CITIZENS, AT DETROIT, 



November 19, 1850. 



1 have taken an oath to support the Constitution — the whole Constitution, not a part 
The Union was born by fraternity, and it must live by fraterniiy, or perish forever. 




WASHINGTON: 
THOMAS RITCHIE, PRINTER. 

1851. 



^^^-i 
3^^ 



SPEECH 



To the following sentiment : — ■ 
Our guest, Hon. A. W. Buel : Eepresenting faith- 
fully the Union sentiment of Michigan, supporting 
earnestly and ably those measures of compromise by 
which alone we could reasonably hope to insure pros- 
perity to our Union and " domestic tranquillity" to 
the several States, aiding by vote and voice the 
friends of freedom everywhere, fearlessly and elo- 
quently defending our State and city against misre- 
presentation and insult, and upholding manfully, upon 
all occasions, the Constitution of his country, he has 
won the noblest title to our respect and gratitude. 
Michigan will sustain him. 

Mr. Buel responded : — 

Fellow-Citizens: If I should be silent on this 
occasion, or fail to respond to the sentiment which 
you have just received with such tokens of approba- 
tion, I feel that I should disobey the first promptings 
of a grateful heart. To those with whom I have 
been politically associated, and who, in times past, 
have often given me their generous support, I owe a 
deep debt of gratitude, which I can never forget. But 



I owe them something more. I owe an unfaltering 
devotion to the principles they have advocated, during 
that trying period, which is testing the stability of 
the republic. 

To enjoy the confidence of one's party is a source 
of satisfaction. But there are times and occasions, 
when the voice of party is in a measure hushed, and 
ancient political landmarks for a season lose their im- 
portance in the all-absorbing thought of the pubHc 
safety. I find myself surrounded now not merely by 
those, who have hitherto been my political friends 
and associates. I perceive something more, which 
gives character to the occasion. Among those who 
participate in it, I recognize many, who have left 
behind them the lines which have hitherto separated 
us, and I cannot but perceive, that in their estimation 
there is something new and extraordinary in the state 
of our public affairs, which calls for new and extraor- 
dinary action. You are assembled, therefore, my 
friends, I choose to believe, not to honor the humble 
individual who addresses you, but the principles, 
Avhich you in common with him advocate. I think 
I am not mistaken, when I say, that you are assem- 
bled to honor the noble feelings which inspire us, 
and to cultivate a spirit of national patriotism in 
opposition to that spirit of sectionalism, which is fast 
severing the bonds of our Union. Parties must exist, 
as they ever have existed in all republics. But when 
our country is in danger; when there exists a very 
general and painful apprehension for its future safety; 



in short, when measures are being concerted for the over- 
throio of the Constitution and the Union, there ought to 

he hut ONE PARTY, AND THAT PARTY OURSELVES, ONE AND 
INSEPARABLE. 

The circumstances of this occasion are such as, I 
trust, will justify the allusions I have made to myself, 
as well as those I may feel constrained to make in 
the continuation of my remarks. I cannot fail to 
recognize in them a personal compliment to myself, 
for which I desire to offer you my sincere thanks and 
gratitude. I can possess and transmit to others no 
more precious testimonial of your approbation than 
that, by which you have seen fit to connect my name 
and my service in Congress with that struggle for the 
Union, which enrolls amongst its defenders the wisest 
patriots and statesmen of the country. 

But you will, I trust, permit me to look beyond all 
personal compliments involved in our present festi- 
vities, for the purpose of submitting some observa- 
tions upon those topics, which have of late so fearfully 
agitated and still agitate the public mind. There is 
no man in this republic, the value of whose position, 
compared with that of preserving the Union, does not 
sink at once into utter insignificance. The times call 
for something more than mere personal expediency. 
In my opinion, that patriotism is unequal to the 
emergency, which dares not meet openly and boldly 
the dangers that surround us, be the personal conse- 
quences what they may. 

I have but recently returned to mingle again with 



6 

my constituency, after an absence of nearly a year. 
During that period, I have passed through the most 
exciting and eventful scenes, that have distinguished 
any session of Congress since the organization of the 
government. The country has enjoyed an unexam- 
pled degree of prosperity; we have lived under the 
happiest and freest government on the face of the 
globe, in the full enjoyment of all the blessings of 
civil and religious liberty. The minister of the Gos- 
pel, the professional man of every kind, the mechanic, 
the merchant, and the farmer, have been free to prose- 
cute their respective pursuits, and enjoy the fruits of 
their labor. Our firesides have been undisturbed by 
the unwelcome sound of war. Yet, in the midst of all 
this prosperity, the nation has been profoundly agi- 
tated. Congress has for nine long months debated, 
and thousands of our fellow-citizens have advocated 
a dissolution of that Union, under whose blessings 
we have been steadily advancing to a degree of pros- 
perity and renown never before attained by any 
nation. 

The signs of approaching evil were manifested on 
the first assembling of the present Congress. In the 
short space of a month a dark cloud gathered over 
the Capitol of our country. It was removed for a 
season, but has now returned; and there it still hangs, 
more pregnant than before with evil and ruin, and 
threatening ere long, unless dispersed, to Inui its bolts 
of wrath, and sweep away the fabric of our Union. 
*' Disunion," and that other word "dissolution," which, 



as an eloquent senator said, ought to be considered 
the ^'^ unpronounceaUe word of our language," became 
familiar and hackneyed. On the loth day of Decem- 
ber, it being less than two weeks after the commence- 
ment of the session, those words were applauded in 
all parts of the House with the most violent clapping 
of hands, as they fell from the lips of a distinguished 
representative from the South. The scene was, it is 
true, one of passion and excitement; but its worst 
omen for the future was, that many representatives 
joined in the applause, who had hitherto been distin- 
guished for coolness, deliberation, and patriotic devo- 
tion to the Union. A few months rolled on; but 
affairs, instead of growing better, became worse. The 
oiant minds of the Senate — men who had seen their 
thirty and forty years' service in the halls of Con- 
gress — now began to tremble before the signs of the 
times. In the strong language of Mr. Webster, " the 
imprisoned ivinds seemed to have been let loase" 

Such was the state of things, in which I found 
myself involved, soon after the assembling of Con- 
gress. I thought it well became us to pause, and turn 
for a season from the usual excitements of business 
and party, and consider, if there were not some means, 
by which we could forever put to rest an agitation so 
serious and alarming in its nature and consequences. 
Extremists upon one side claimed everything for the 
North, and extremists upon the other everything for 
the South. It was evident, therefore, that there could 
be no settlement without some mutucd concession. 



8 

Such was the state of things, when, in the spirit of 
concihation and a lofty patriotism, Mr. CLay brought 
forward his compromise resokitions. They reLated 
chiefly to the settlement of the Texan boundary, the 
establishment of territorial governments for Utah and 
New Mexico, the admission of California, the abolition 
of the slave trade in the District of Columbia, and 
the surrender of fugitive slaves. The resolution upon 
the latter sul^ject was in these words : 

^'Resolved, That more effectual provisions ought to be made by law, 
according to the requirements of the Constitution, for the restitution and 
delivery of persons bound to service or labor in any State who may 
escape into any other State or Territory in the Union." 

These resolutions were referred to the compromise 
committee, consisting of an equal representation from 
the two great parties, and from both sections of the 
Union, having Mr. Clay for chairman. The commit- 
tee reported a series of compromise bills, usually call- 
ed the "compromise system," or "peace measures." 
These consisted of the so-called "omnibus bill," which 
provided for settling the Texas boundary, establishing 
territorial governments over New Mexico and Utah, 
and for admitting California entire as a new State; a 
bill for abolishing the slave trade in the District of 
Columbia, and a bill providing for the more effectual 
surrender of fugitive slaves. The "omnibus bill" was 
first considered, and, after several months of exciting 
and angry discussion, was defeated. The friends of 
the Union, not yet despairing of being able to effect 
some adjustment between the North and South, now 



rallied in support of each compromise bill or measure 
by itself. I will not detain you with a detailed his- 
tory of these bills in the Senate, and the various 
amendments offered or adopted, and the further ex- 
citing discussions, which were at last terminated with 
the separate adoption by the Senate of each measure. 
These measures came to the House as they passed 
the Senate, the Texan boundary bill being first in the 
series. I should weary your patience by undertaking 
to analyze them on this occasion. I cannot say, that 
I approved of every provision contained in these vari- 
ous bills. But I felt, that there was a pressing neces- 
sity for adjusting speedily in some form the difficult 
questions, which now, more than ever, threatened the 
future peace of the country. With time and angry 
discussion, the aspect of affairs had become much 
more alarming. Texas had been concerting measures 
for occupying the disputed territory. Almost the en- 
tire population of the South was beginning to sympa- 
thize actively with her. Governor Quitman, of Mis- 
sissippi, had published a letter to the effect that, in 
the event of a collision of arms, or great danger 
thereof, he would deem it his duty to convene the 
legislature of his State, and recommend the adoption 
of prompt and efficient measures to aid Texas. But, 
in the mean time, the late President had taken mea- 
sures for concentrating troops at Santa Fe, under the 
apprehension of an open conflict with Texas, and the 
present President had sent his special message to 
Congress, earnestly urging upon that body the import- 



10 

ance of a speedy adjustment, but at the same time 
expressing his determination to maintain possession 
of the disputed territory with the mihtary power of 
the government, until the question should be settled. 
The Texas legislature was holding a special session, 
and devising means for raising several regiments of 
troops to be marched to Santa Fe. Thus were mat- 
ters rapidly approaching the crisis of civil war, the 
end of which, when once commenced, no one could 
foresee. 

But there was much more now to excite attention 
in the general aspect of affairs. The Nashville Con- 
vention had been held, composed of representatives 
from nearly every Southern State, and many of them 
had been sent there, not by excited popular conven- 
tions, but in pursuance of special State legislation. 
That convention had issued its address to the coun- 
trj^, which Mr. Webster, on the floor of the Senate, 
pronounced a "disunion argument," and had adjourn- 
ed, to meet again after the adjournment of Congress. 

Besides, South Carolina, it was known, was quite 
ripe for secession, and was waiting only for Southern 
support. Georgia — even the patriotic State of Geor- 
gia, which had stood by Jackson and the Union in 
former days of trial — had at last yielded to the pres- 
sure of agitation. Its legislature had declared her 
settled hostility to the admission of California and 
the passage of the Wilmot Proviso, in the most so- 
lemn manner, by providing by lo.w for a special con- 



11 

vention, to be elected and assembled upon the hap- 
pening of either of those events. 

There was another feature in Congress, that could 
not fail to attract the attention of the friends of ad- 
justment and of the Union — the progress of extreme 
but opposite opinions — opinions, which were not in 
themselves identical with disunion ; but which, being 
utterly irreconcilable, if persisted in, must necessarily 
lead to disunion. I cannot say, that, at the opening 
of the session, there was a disunionist in Congress. 
Even Mr. Calhoun was highly offended at an expres- 
sion of a senator, which he understood as intimating, 
that he was a disunionist. I do not wish or deem it 
proper for me here to reflect upon any portion of the 
honorable body, of which I am now a member; yet I 
can truly say, that, since the meeting of Congress, ex- 
treme opinions had made an alarming progress in that 
body as well as amongst the people. These opinions 
were so extreme but opposite, that, it was manifest, 
they could never be reconciled without concession and 
compromise. There were the Northern extreme and 
the Southern extreme, both of which were as wide 
apart as the poles ; and yet both in Congress for many 
months joined hands and votes against the compro- 
mise measures, as a scheme for adjusting all the diffi- 
cult questions, and restoring peace and harmony to 
the country. 

As for myself, I was but a young and humble 
member of the body. My influence might not pro- 
ceed beyond my own vote ; but I felt even that to be 



12 

a solemn responsibility, when I believed, as I did, 
that, to its own extent at least, it might be a vote for 
or against the preservation of the Constitution and 
the Union. Between the friends of the compromise 
measures from the North and South, there was an 
implied faith, that they would sustain them all in 
their essential features. Without such implication, 
it is well known they could never have passed. 

Under such circumstances, what was my duty? 
Was it to vote with those, Avhose opinions and prac- 
tice, if not designing, were at least, as I thought, fast 
tending to a dissolution of the Union ? Was it to 
vote with either extreme ? No. I would not, I could 
not do it. I owed it to my honor, to sustain in good 
faith the entire series of measures in their substantial 
features. I owed it to myself, to my honest convic- 
tions, to my sincere apprehensions as to the future; 
yes, I owed it to my conscience, to my oath, to my 
COUNTRY, to pursue such a course, as I thought w^ould 
best restore peace and harmony to a divided people, 
avert the dangers of civil war, and perpetuate the 
Union with its unnumbered blessings. I determined 
to do, what I thought was my duty as a national 
representative, regardless of personal consequences; 
and the consciousness of having been actuated by the 
most sacred of all wishes and motives, is to me an 
ample defence against the detraction and calumny, 
which have recently been lavished upon me without 
measure. 

Nine months of angry discussion rolled away, before 



13 

the first of the compromise measures finally passed 
the House of Representatives. The others speedily 
followed, and their passage was attended with such a 
spontaneous outburst of public rejoicing, as never be- 
fore had been witnessed at the Capitol. Heartfelt 
congratulations, bands of music, public processions, 
popular meetings and addresses in the streets, bon- 
fires, and the firing of cannon testified to the common 
joy; all seemed to speak out, "the Union is now 
SAFE." Even many rejoiced, who had steadily op- 
posed the adjustment measures. The country re- 
joiced. The leading public journals of opposite poli- 
tical parties rejoiced, with congratulations to their 
readers ; and it was to me a source of personal satis- 
faction and pride, that but few, if any, testified more 
strongly their approbation, than those of my own 
district and State. 

But now the scene has suddenly changed, and the 
theatre of nullification has been transferred from 
others to ourselves. We cannot shut our eyes to the 
fact, that a fresh storm of agitation has come upon 
us, which, if not stayed, threatens most seriously the 
continuance of the republic. The patriotic and in- 
spiring language, which Jackson once addressed to 
others, his spirit now addresses to us ; and the friends 
of peace and fraternity are once more called upon to 
stand by the Constitution and the Union. 

Amongst the measures of adjustment was one for 
the more efiectual surrender of fugitive slaves, accord- 
ing to the requirements of the Constitution. It was 



14 

well understood, that such a bill should pass, as part 
of the system of peace measures. The Constitution 
of the United States (art. iv., sec. 2) declares, that 
fugitives from service or labor " shall he delivered up 
on claim of the party to wliom such service or labor may 
he duer Not may he, hut " shall he delivered up,'' is 
the language. It does not simply confer upon Con- 
gress power, but commands and makes it the duty of 
Congress to act upon the subject, and pass such laws 
as may effectually fulfil the requirement of the Con- 
stitution. 

The Constitution, however, is not the only source, 
to which we may apply for instruction and authority 
upon the subject. The ordinance of 1787 has lately 
Ijeen frequently invoked as high authority upon other 
subjects, and by many, who now advocate an abso- 
lute repeal of the law to which I allude. I have 
o'reat respect for that ordinance, and to many, upon 
questions of freedom, it has had almost the authority 
of the Delphian Oracle. In regard to fugitive slaves, it 
is almost an exact duplicate of so much of the Consti- 
tution as pertains to the same subject; and here is to 
be found, what has been recently called the Wilmot 
Proviso, resting side hy side, in the same hed and same 
paragraph, with a provision for the surrender of fugi- 
tice slaves. 

Ordinance of 1787, article G: '-There shall be nei- 
ther slavery nor involuntary servitude in said terri- 
tories, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes 
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted: 



15 

Provided, always, That any person escaping into the 
same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed 
in any one of the original States, such fugitive may 
be lawfully reclaimed, and conveyed to the person 
claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid." 

It was in accordance with this provision of the or- 
dinance of 1787, and that of the Constitution from 
which I have quoted, that the fugitive slave act of 
1793 was passed and approved by Washington. •■^' 

* Amongst the acts of the hast day of John Adams's administra- 
tion, may be found a remarkable one, upon the subject of the surren- 
der of fugitive slaves, and to which the public attention has not 
hitherto been called. It is the more remarkable, as it throws much 
light upon the Constitution, as construed half a century since, by 
placing fugitives from justice and fugitives from labor on a like foot- 
ing, in respect to their rights in the district, to which they may escape. 

An Act supplementary to the Act entitled " An Act concerning 
the District of Columbia." 

Sect. 6. And he it farther enacted, That in all cases where the 
Constitution or laws of the United States provide that criminals and 
fugitives from justice or persons held to labor in any State, escapin-^ 
into another State, shall be delivered up, the chief justice of the said 
district shall be, and he is hereby empowered and required to cause to 
be apprehended and delivered up such criminal, fugitive from justice, 
or persons fleeing from service, as the case may be, who shall be 
found within the district, in the t^anie manner and under the same 
regulations as the executive authority of the several States are required 
to do the same; and all executive and judicial officers are hereby re- 
quired to obey ail lawful precepts or other process issued for that pur- 
pose, and to be aiding and assisting in such delivery. 

Approved March 3d, 1801. 

JOHN ADAMS. 

(See Laws, U. S., 2 V. p. 116.) 



16 

This law miglit have been sufficient for its purposes, 
had its execution not been obstructed. But it is well 
known, that certain individuals at the North, compa- 
ratively few in numbers, entertaining extreme opin- 
ions upon the subject of slavery, have thrown such 
obstacles in the way of its execution, that it has 
proved ineffectual for its designs. This led to earnest 
complaints by the South, that the Constitution was 
practically nullified in regard to this subject, and the 
recent act of Congress is an amendment to the law of 
1793, designed effectually to carry out its principles, 
and in good faith comply with the requirement of the 
Constitution. It originates no new principle in re- 
spect to the liberty of the person claimed as a slave. 
The essential difference in respect to him is really in 
his favor, inasmuch as, by the law of 1793, the claim- 
ant was authorized to arrest and seize his fugitive 
slave by force and without process, whilst the law of 
1850 authorizes legal proceedings in the first instance. 
A seizure by force, even if legal, canuot but be repug- 
nant to our feelings, and a resort to the forms of law 
was considered as more in accordance with the spirit 
of our institutions. 

There are other respects, in which the late law 
differs from that of 1793, but they do not change 
substantially the rights of the slave. They are de- 
signed chiefly to insure the execution of the law after 
the right of the claimant has been established. 

I ought not to omit to notice, in this connection, 
some of the gross misrepresentations of this law, 



17 

which have been industriously circulated by means of 
inflammatory handbills, and by inflammatory articles, 
contained in those journals, which were once loud in 
praising the compromise measures, the fugitive slave 
laio included. Many have doubtless honestly yielded 
to these misrepresentations, but time and reflection 
will correct the errors into which they have fallen. 
Even some, I regret to say, of an intelhgent and 
patriotic clergy, have been led astray by these inflam- 
matory misrepresentations, and their weight has fallen 
upon me even from the pulpit. I trust they will cor- 
rect the error, not for my sake merely, bat for thc^ 
sake of those, whom they have been instrumental in 
misleading. I rely with confidence upon their readi- 
ness to do justice to me, or at least to those of whom 
they are spiritual advisers. 

The law was charged with being unconstitutional. 
That error has been dispelled, and no man of repu- 
tation will now hazard it by denying the constitution- 
ality of the law. It was said, too, that the \-d\\ 
abolishes the right of trial by jury, a^s if the fugitive 
enjoyed that right under the law of 1793, and it Avas 
taken away by the law of 1850. He may test the 
question of his freedom in the State from Avhich he 
escapes, by jury trial, like an}' white citizen, but he 
has never under any law of the Unitcxi States had 
that right in the State to which he escapes. Thus in 
this respect the laws of 1793 and 1850 are identicaUy 
the same. I know of many upon mIioiu this error 
has been succcssfidly imposed. Many were made to 
2 



18 

brieve too, that the law suspends the writ of haheas 
corpus, and this error could not he corrected until it 
had led to fixed prejudices, over which truth does not 
easily prevail. It is now well understood and con- 
ceded, that the law could not constitutionally, and in 
fact does not, suspend the writ of habeas corpus. 
But the list of gross misrepresentations does not stop 
here. People were told, that the law of 1850 im- 
poses a penalty of 81,000 on every one, who shall 
refuse to aid in the arres^t of a fugitive slave. There 
is no such provision in the law, and it does not 
impose the penalty of a single farthing for such refu- 
sal. It has been also represented, that all the fees and 
expenses attending the proceedings under this law are 
to be paid out of the public treasury. No grosser 
misrepresentation could have been circulated, since 
the law expressly provides, that all such fees and ex- 
penses shall be ^^paid hy such claimants, their agents 
or attorneys, whether such supposed fugitive from ser- 
vice or labor be ordered to be deUvered to such claim- 
ants bv the final determination of such commissioner 
or not," and in the late case arising in this city, I am 
informed, that such fees and expenses were paid by 
the claimant to the amount of several hundred dol- 
lars. It is true that, in the case of a threatened res- 
cue by force, after a decision in favor of the claimant, 
the marshal may be required to remove the slave out 
of the State at the expense of the government. This, 
however, cannot be done without proof of a threatened 
rescue. If those, who make this complaint against the 



19 

law, would allow it to be executed, the ground of the 
comjjlaint would not exist. This provision evidently 
assumes, that it would be unjust to compel the claim- 
ant, to bear the expense of overcoming a mob assem- 
bled to resist the execution of the law, after that law 
has decided in his favor. 

Such are some of the many errors, which have 
been industriously circulated among the people con- 
cerning the fugitive slave law. Many have no doubt 
honestly confided in them, and they may justly hold 
those responsible, whose sujDerio'r means of information 
ought to protect themselves as well as others against 
such misrepresentations. 

I cannot with propriety further detain you with a 
detailed legal exposition of the provisions of the law 
of 1850. I desire, however, to quote a passage from 
the opinion of Attorney-General Crittenden, given to 
President Fillmore before he approved the bill. Says 
he, in that opinion : — 

" This bill, therefore, confers no right on the owner of the fugitive 
slave. It only gives him an appointed and peaceable remedy," &c. 

And again he says : — 

"The act of February 12, 1793, before alluded to, so far as it re- 
spects any constitutional question that can arise out of this bill, is 
identical with it. It authorizes the like arrest of the fugitive slave, 
the like trial, the like judgment, the like certificate, with the like au- 
thority to the owner, by virtue of that certificate as his warrant, to 
remove him to the State or Territory from which he escaped ; and the 
constitutionality of that act in all those particulars has been affirmed 
by the adjudications of State tribunals and by the courts of the United 
States without a single dissent, so far as I know." — (Baldwin's C C 
Pt., 577, 579.) 



20 

I have thus far alluded to the fugitive slave law, 
not for the purpose of defending it in every single pro- 
vision, but for sustaining it as one of the great com- 
promise measures designed for the pacification of the 
country. It may in some respects he improved or 
modified, and I shall be happy in returning to my 
seat in Congress, a slave to no pledges, which will 
prevent me from voting and acting upon any question 
of amendment or modification, as my conscience, my 
oath, and my best judgment may dictate. Few hu- 
man laws are made perfect in the first instance. I 
desire to see this law made as perfect as practicable, 
with a view of rendering exact justice to the slave, 
and at the same time standing by the Constitution of 
my country. If it were a question of mere philan- 
throj)y or humanity towards the slave, I would go as 
far as any in his favor. But I will not go one step 
with any, who desire to break down or leap over the 
barriers of the Constitution. I know of no advantage, 
which I can put in competition with that sacred in- 
strument, as the basis — the sole basis — of the Ame- 
rican Union. 

The absolute repeal of the law, therefore, presents 
a very different question ; and that leads me to sub- 
mit a few remarks upon the present state of affairs. 
Elections of a very exciting character have just been 
held in several of the Northern States, and I have 
been advised, that, in inan}^ instances — and I know 
it to be true in some — members of Congress have been 
elected upon solemn and written pledges to an abso- 



21 

lute repeal of the law in question, without amendment 
or modification. In some instances, all other ques- 
tions have been overlooked, and repeal has formed the 
single and only issue. It is this fact, which now gives 
just cause for fresh apprehension to the friends of the 
Union, both North and South. Eepeal, repeal, re- 
peal, is now the watchword of new agitation.* 

What in substance are the questions thus present- 
ed? They are, whether peace and fraternity shall 
reign between the States of this confederacy, or agita- 
tion triumph with all its present evils and future dan- 
gers ; whether we will stand by the compromise mea- 
sures of Congress, or undo all that was done, after 
nine months of incessant and intense agitation; in 
fact, whether we will stand by the Union and the 
Constitution. Every candid observer must see, that 
repeal is disunion. I have had some advantages for 
knowing the exact state of public sentiment amongst 
our Southern brethren; and it is my sincere convic- 
tion, that an absolute repeal of the law would inevi- 
tably lead to disunion, and disunion must lead to the 
horrors of a civil war, such as has never before been 
witnessed, and the end of which no man can foresee. 

* Mr. Buel's eoiupetitor for Congress at the late election in Miclii- 
gan, published a letter, in which he denounced the Fugitive Slave 
Law in strong language, and, without suggesting or alluding to any 
amendment or modification of it, closed with the following words : — 

" I AM FOR ITS SPEEDY REPEAL." 

(Signed) E. J. PENNIMAN. 

(Dated) Plymouth, Oct. 18, 1850. 



22 

Whoever, therefore, is for repeal, is for disunion, 
though he may not design it. Whoever is for repeal, 
must resolve to disregard the positive requirement of 
the Constitution, that fugitive slaves "shall be deli- 
vered up," In the language of Mr. Webster : " I put 
it to all the sober and sound minds at the North, as 
a question of morals and a question of conscience. 
What right have they, in all their legislative capacity 
or any other, to endeavor to get round this Constitu- 
tion, to embarrass the free exercise of the rights se- 
cured by the Constitution, to the person whose slaves 
escaped from them ? None at all — none at all. Nei- 
ther in the forum of conscience nor before the face of 
the Constitution are they justified, in my opinion." 

For myself, therefore, entertaining such views, I 
cannot join in the agitation cry of repeal. Upon this 
question, I say it boldly, I am a peace man, an anti- 
agitation man, a compromise man, a Uxion man. I 
stand before you as such, and wish to address you 
as such, by whatever party name you have hitherto 
been designated. All other party questions, in my 
opinion, sink into insignificance, compared with those 
raised by any issue, that involves ultimately the peace 
of the country and the dissolution of this Union. 

But absolute repeal of one of the adjustment mea- 
sures is demanded. I put this question to the North, 
as a question of justice, of right and wrong : Is it just 
for the North now to hold on to all she gained by the 
compromise, and take back what she or rather what 
the Constitution gave to the South? Has not the 



23 

Nortli great reason for being satisfied with tlie com- 
promise measures? We gained the admission of the 
free State of Cahfornia without any division of her 
territory. We gained territorial governments over 
Utah and New Mexico without recognition of slavery. 
We gained the abolition of the slave traffic in the 
District of Columbia. And, as a compensation for all 
this, what did we do? We agreed to abide by the 
Constitution, and passed a law to carry out its require- 
ments in respect to the surrender of fugitive slaves. 

It is plain to see wdiere the difficulty arises. It 
comes from a species of extremism, peculiar to each 
section of the Union. From this extremism has sprung 
that most baneful of all ideas, the idea of sectionalism ^ 
of geograpliical parties, against which we have been 
warned by the Father of our Country, and which he 
seemed to foresee as the rock of our future danger. 
This sectionalism claims on one side everything for 
the North, and on the other everything for the South. 
Hence it is the natural mother of national feud and 
discord. Here are our Scylla and Charybdis. If we 
would avoid them in the future, this spirit of section- 
alism must be supplanted wdth that of nationalism. 
We must think more of the whole Union, I do not 
say, less of its parts. We must cultivate a national, 
instead of a sectional patriotism; and, above all, we 
must cultivate that spirit of fraternity, in icJiich the 
Union had its birth, hy whicli it lives, and icithout ichich 
it must die. 

Can there be a false.r standard of patriotism than 



24 

that erected by the sectionalism to which I have 
alluded? It is the standard oi lyroscriptwn — for it 
proscribes every locality save that in Avhich it origin- 
ates. It is the standard of extremism — for it allows 
no middle course. It is the standard oi partiality and 
Injustice — for it seeks legislation to benefit a part, ra- 
ther than the whole. It exists equally on both sides 
of the Union, and hence comes the danger. It calls 
upon Southern representatives to stand up and claim 
all for the South, and Northern representatives to 
stand up and claim all for the North. Well, suppose 
this shall be done. What, then, will become of the 
Union ? Who will be left to stand up and claim any- 
thing for that ? None — none. She will cease to exist, 
for she will be converted into two hostile sections, 
each battling for itself, and none for her. Such is 
the inevitable tendency of that sectionalism, which 
has already well nigh severed the bonds of the Union. 
Where, tlicn, ought I to be found in Congress? 
Shall I act with either sectional extreme? I cannot 
do it, since I regard the spirit of sectionalism as the 
parent of our greatest dangers. I say now, as I have 
said in the House of Representatives, that I am not 
"merely the representative of the district, State, or 
region of country from which I come, but of the ivhole 
Union, and I am proud of it — all and every partr 
You will pardon, I trust, these personal allusions to 
myself. The occasion and circumstances b}^ which I 
am attended will, I am sure, justify them in ^-our 
estimation. I can now recur with satisfaction to 



25 

my sentiments, as they were openly avowed to the 
convention by which I was nominated, as a candidate 
for election to Congress in 1848. I quote from my 
remarks on that occasion : 

"If elected, I shall approach the discharge of my duties with diffi- 
dence, but firmness; and in that event offer a pledge of all my time 
and services, that I may render myself a worthy representative of the 
flourishing emporium of our flourishing State, worthy of the district 
whose interests may be more immediately confided to me, and worthy 
of the peninsular State. 

"With a view to other and wider interests, I should hope to render 
myself a worthy representative of the North and West; but with a 
still more comi^rehensive vision, I should hope not to overlook my du- 
ties and ohUgations to the Constitution. I should hope to become a 
worthy representative of the Union. The Union— there is a power in 
that word, which with me overcomes all. It has a charm, which I can- 
not resist. It speaks with a siren voice, that wins to its embrace. 
From childhood I have been taught to venerate it; and that, which 
was worthy of veneration then, now hangs in the memory holier still, 
as a household treasure upon the family altar. I hope never to assist 
in marring that national picture, which is adorned with the deeds and 
heroes of the Revolution, and with the glorious achievements of two 
subsequent wars, that have covered us over with imperishable fame 
and renown. I hope never to aid in drawing that black line of dis- 
union, which can never be drawn without dividing asunder the graves 
of the Revolution." 

At the same time, in all my public addresses imme- 
diately preceding my election, in respect to legislation 
hy Congress against slavery in the new and free terri- 
tory, I held to the expediency of non-intervention. I 
then fully believed, and endeavored to show, that this 
plan, if carried out, would result satisfactorily to the 
country; and the condition of affairs in Congress has 



26 

proven it to be the only plan, upon which the danger- 
ous question could be settled. For this view of the 
question I received no small share of censure from 
my political opponents and their leading journals, and 
I was even publicly and in writing invited to a dis- 
cussion of it through the district, by my competitor, 
who pledged himself in the letter of invitation to the 
opposite opinion. Having apprehension of the dan- 
gers, which have now nearly overtaken us, I then 
indulged in and stood committed to the sentiments 
above referred to, and I endeavored to secure their 
success in the passage of the late peace measures of 
Congress. 

But, gentlemen, we hear it constantly said "there 
is no danger." What do people expect? Shall we 
look for signs in the heavens to warn us of the future? 
Must an earthquake come to arouse us from our slum- 
ber? We go about inquiring "what new advices?" 
Can anything be more new, than that Americans 
should be debating the dissolution of the Union ? We 
may meet the danger when it is actually upon us, but 
it may then be beyond our control. It may then be 
too late. It is far wiser to prevent than to combat 
the dangers of the future. 

Our greatest cause of danger is our blindness to our 
actual condition and to the events that are passing 
around us. We have seen Congress unable to legis- 
late for a period of nhic months. The wheels of go- 
vernment were almost stopped for the want of appro- 
priations. For a long period the government, with 



27 

all its officers, civil, military, and executive, was 
without money. The army was unpaid. The navy 
was unpaid. Our foreign ministers were unpaid; and, 
in fact, every branch of the government was threat- 
ened with dissolution, not by the sword, but by simple 
stoppage. Conventions have been held, one after 
another, all over the country, some for Union and 
some for Disunion. The laws of the Union are threat- 
ened with resistance in the South and with resistance 
in the North. 

Shall we look further into the sad picture? What, 
then, is now going on at Nashville ? A convention 
from the Southern States reassembled and reopened 
with the language of secession. What is Georgia 
doing? Engaged in electing a convention to delibe- 
rate upon secession. What is Mississippi doing? Her 
governor has called a special session of the legislature 
to consider of secession. Look at the progress of se- 
cession sentiments in Alabama. I need not allude to 
the state of things in South Carolina. Hear the lan- 
guage of the patriotic State of North Carolina, and 
many other States, which have never before faltered 
in their attachment to the Union, all solemnly declar- 
ing, that, upon this fresh agitation, if successful, hangs 
its final destiny. Brethren of one great family are 
beginning to look upon each other as enemies. The 
fraternal cords of the Union have been broken— the 
religious cords have been partially sundered. The 
process of social and religious disorganization has 
commenced even amoug ourselves. Ancient party 



28 

lines and landmarks are beginning to disappear, and 
former party questions are fast sinking into the vortex 
of sectionalism. Yet we go on, as if thoughtless of 
the present or future, hlind to luhat is actually hefore 
our eyes, deaf to the sounds hrougld to our ears upon 
every hreeze, and dumb, exceft to lull ourselves to sleep 
with the soft tuords, " there is no danger." 

Whilst such is the fearful progress of disorganiza- 
tion about us, we maybe able to measure the j^resent ; 
but who can measure the future ? Who can tell, when 
and where it is to stop? From what is passing around 
us we should draw some useful lessons. Our danger 
springs not so much from the adoption of aggressive 
measures against either section of the Union, as 
from threatening and agitating them. Agitation has 
brought us to our present condition, without the adop- 
tion of that measure, which our Southern brethren 
regarded with so much hostility. But there is now a 
renewed agitation, started upon a more dangerous 
basis than the former. If persisted in, who can tell 
to what point it may drive us, that shall be short of 
anarchy and civil war — civil war, not only with our 
Southern brethren, but at last with ourselves ? 

I am aware, fellow-citizens, that I have used strong 
language ; but supineness and timidity are unequal to 
the times. I may err in my apprehensions of the 
future. I wish I could be assured of it. But if I do, 
I err in connnon with the ablest and wisest states- 
men and patriots of the land. They have thought 
and declared that there was and is danger. I have 



29 

read the warning language of McLean, that "there is 
enough in the general aspect of our affairs, if not to 
alarm, at least to admonish us, that every cord which 
binds us together should be strengthened." 

I have seen Cass standing up, like the strong oak 
of the forest, breasting the storm of sectionalism from 
the North and the South -, and there, too, side by side 
and shoulder to shoulder with him, stood Clay and 
Webster. To this list might be added the names of 
Cobb and Boyd, of Dickinson, Douglass, Houston, 
Foote, and many others, too numerous to mention, of 
both 23olitical parties and both sections of the Union. 
I have seen all these with true patriotism leaping over 
the boundaries of party, forgetting all personal or 
party feuds, and mingling their voices in one common 
effort to turn away the storm. Ought we, my friends, 
to hesitate in following their patriotic example? 

But we are told, that we can fight for the Union. 
So we can, and we may be successful. But what 
kind of a republic — Avliat sort of a free government — 
what sort of an American Union will that be, bound 
together by the sword and by cords drenched in fra- 
ternal blood? If needs be, I trust that the Union 
contains enough of strong arms and brave hearts to 
sustain it under all contingencies. Let us hold on to 
it, as the dearest object of our affections. Let us 
cling to it the stronger, as the storm rages more 
fiercely. It is the property of our children as well as 
of ourselves. It is the property of the world, and is 
the world's minister of Christianity, civilization, and 



30 

liberty. I ^visll to see it preserved at all hazards, but 
preserved by the ties of affection rather than by the 
sword. I wish to see its great arsenal of defence in 
our hearts. The Union was born by fraternity, 

AND IT MUST LIVE BY FRATERNITY, OR PERISH FOREVER. 

[Mr. Buel was here presented by David Stewart, 
Esq., in behalf of the committee of arrangements, 
with a copy of the Constitution of the United States, 
printed upon parchment, and bearing the inscription, 

" PRESENTED TO 

HON. ALEXANDER W. BUEL, 

REPRESENTATIVE IN THE THIRTY-FIRST CONGRESS FROM MICHIGAN, 

As a testimonial of regard for his consistent support in Congress 
of the Constitution of his Country, 

AT A PUBLIC DINNER GIVEN TO HIM BY HIS FELLOW-CITIZEKS AT DETROIT, 

November 19, 1850." 

Mr. Buel thus continued his remarks : — ] 

I desire to express to those, in whose behalf I have 
been presented with this testimonial of regard my 
most grateful acknowledgments. I can possess no 
more valuable evidence of the regard of my fellow- 
citizens than that, by which they have seen lit to con- 
nect my service in Congress with the defence of the 
Constitution of my country. I shall thereby be ever 
reminded afresh of my duty and obligation to sus- 
tain it. 

I regard this sacred instrument as the bond of our 
national Union, the basis of our national safety. Its 
fabric was raised by the hands of our revohitionary 



oi 

fathers; its foundations were cemented bj their 
blood. Ought we to do less for it than they ? They 
have transmitted it to us as the most precious legacy 
they could bequeath, and not for us alone, but for our 
children and our children's children. Let us, then, 
swear to stand by it and defend it to the last extre- 
mity, in these the days of its trial. It is better to 
contend for the first than the last line of the Consti- 
tution. 

For myself, I have taken an oath to support that 
Constitution — the loliole Constitution, not a part. 
What right have I to hold on to one-half and reject 
the other? None at all — none at all. I shall endeavor 
faithfully to fulfil my oath, my whole oath. He has 
read history to but little advantage, who has not 
learned the wisdom of the maxim — "Zea? suprema, 
salus poindiy It is my present and will be my last 
hope, that the independent rights of the States, as 
secured by this instrument, may not be violated — that 
each may hold fast upon the Constitution — that its 
guarantees may be ever held sacred and inviolable — 
that the Union, with its unmeasured blessings, may 
be perpetuated as our most precious inheritance, and 
its Star of Promise fulfil the just expectations of our 
children and an admirins: world. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



C<^,u 



2' S-* 






^i:^. 



